Re: what does "serialization" mean?

From: Edward G. Nilges (spinoza1111_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 06/25/04 

Date: 24 Jun 2004 16:54:25 -0700

Corey Murtagh <emonk@slingshot.no.uce> wrote in message news:<1088088591.185713@radsrv1.tranzpeer.net>...
> Edward G. Nilges wrote:
> > Corey Murtagh <emonk@slingshot.no.uce> wrote in message news:<1088031594.10854@radsrv1.tranzpeer.net>...
> >
> >>Edward G. Nilges wrote:
> <snip>
> >>>Look Ma, somebunny can't see the forest for the trees. No, Chris
> >>>honey, XML is best used exclusively with what is ordinarily meant by
> >>>ascii.
> >>
> >>Regardless of what /you/ may think is 'ordinarily meant' by ascii, the
> >>American Standard Code for Information Interchange is reasonably well
> >>defined. As is UTF-8, UTF-16 and a number of other character sets
> >>and/or codings. And since you seem to be particularly without clue,
> >>I'll loan you one of mine: ASCII != UTF-8.
> >
> > Again, the pseudo-expert maintains pseudo-expertise by means of the
> > self-protective gesture, which is to assert a negative fact without
> > taking the risk of asserting a positive fact.
>
> Unlike you I make no ridiculous claims about my expertise, nor do I
> attempt to present myself as an authority on any and every topic I have
> some minor interest in. The above was quite simply me pointing out what
> anyone with the expertise you /claim/ to possess should know.

Despite the fact that he is no friend of mine, Arthur O'Dwyer has
requested that you clowns cease and desist these attacks and he
acknowledges that I don't persist unless attacked.

I don't know where you get the idea that I present myself as an
authority on all topics, UNLESS to technically educated functional
illiterates a complete sentence is a claim to authority. Indeed, most
recently I acknowledged lack of expertise as regards NP completeness.

I think you confuse an absence of narcissism and a genuine interest in
topics over and above a narrow technical sphere with false authority.
>
> > Commonly used with adequate precision, ASCII refers to the 256
> > character set that was introduced by non-IBM computer manufacturers as
> > an alternative to the 8 bit, 256 character EBCDIC encoding. ASCII
> > survived and EBCDIC did not because ASCII properly sequenced letters.
>
> So tell me eddie, what exactly /is/ character 0x90 in ASCII? Or indeed

My name isn't "eddie". In any face to face encounter you'd do me the
courtesy of using my name if only because of physical cowardice.

> any of the characters from the Unicode block labelled "C1 Controls"?
> How about ASCII character 0xB0, which several different ASCII charts
> list different values for?

The acronym Ascii has a variety of referents, however, in a binary
opposition to international characters useful in the real work you
neglect to engage in this trolling behavior, it means 0..255. In other
contexts it means the same as what IBM documents refer to as the
graphical character set and what I refer to in published material as
"the characters displayed in common fonts such as Times New Roman and
Courier New and available on the most common keytops".

What burns your ass is that I have sufficiently wide experience
(which, in fact, commenced with 6-bit BCD, transitioned through the
8-bit EBCDIC era, and learned ASCII years ago) to be able to produce
what are in fact precise definitions based on praxis, whereas you have
had to painfully memorize and swot.

>
> > The pseudo-expert is typically unconscious of history and therefore
> > must assert negative facts, for all he knows is there is no knowledge
> > and no memory.
>
> And the pompous fool is typically incapable of admitting fault.
>
Not where it doesn't apply, jerk face.
 
> > You are filibustering the important distinction which is between FF
> > and 100 for this is where international characters begin. You are
> > trolling this discussion thread in a way Arthur O'Dwyer has appealed
> > you to cease.
>
> Since I am not a soldier of fortune and am not involved in any way with
> legislative processes, I question the validity of your use of the word
> 'filibustering'. However since you are quite vocal about your right to

Totalitarians and Fascists are often self-appointed language police.
This commenced in fact with Strunk and White and continues today in
racist reactions to Hispanic instruction and Ebonics, as well as
constant attacks on the creativity of language in the name of
centralized authority.

> apply new meanings to words without explanation, I guess we'll just have
> to guess at what you /really/ mean.
>
All you have to do in fact is read the frigging definitions. What part
of 0..255 don't you understand?
 
> >>>Part of the reason for the 80% failure rate of enterprise systems is
> >>>little circles and groups with their own private language.
> >>
> >>Ah, nostalgia. Has anyone kept a list of the hundreds of things that
> >>eddie has claimed are responsible (in part or in full) for that mythical
> >>80% failure rate?
> >
> > My name is not Eddie, and again, this is behavior which Arthur O'Dwyer
> > has requested you cease. Furthermore, since as a pseudo-expert all you
> > have to disseminate is ignorance in the form of negative claims, you
> > are obviously resentful of a person with knowledge and memory.
>
> Note the lower-case 'e' above. That is not a typo.
>
> As for 'negative claims'... my claim that ASCII is /not/ the same as
> UTF-8 is quite positive, I assure you. It is not a claim made in
> ignorance, either of history or fact.
>
> Your constant diatribes and character assassination attempts are getting
> rather tiresome. Time to up the dosage again eddie.

My name is not "eddie". It is Edward.

Racists and other thugs label people. They call them "niggers",
"spics", "fags" and "bitches". This is because the colonialist wants
to assert his superiority to others by being the only one with
language.

You are through moronization and overspecialization unable, as I have
been able at three universities, to explain concepts in the only clear
way possible, through the history of praxis. You are, I would guess,
one of those horrible fat men who give boring presentations based on a
private language refracted through the professional cowardice of your
overspecialization and as such you are part of the 80% failure rate of
enterprise system and you are the reason why American programming jobs
are migrating offshore.